Feminist Horror...Movies

Laci Green has done a short video looking at some horror movies with a feminist message. Nice to have some options for this Halloween week.

Creeping on women is creepy. *UPDATE*

For some reason, there are guys that think commenting on women's physical attributes is pleasing to women...when it has nothing to do with what the women are doing/talking about. Then there are the guys that think they are accomplishing something valuable in "screaming" words like TITS in comment sections... Guys? You are just being dicks.

From Cracked.com:

10 Creepy Comments That Only Women Get On the Internet -- powered by Cracked.com

As has been long noted, this is something that happens to women. If it happens to a guy, it's a rare thing, and it isn't built into a hostile sexual cultural norm. Women are expected to just put up with it, or never come on the Internet ever again. That's the choice women are often given.

Fuck that.


And if you want to swim in the inane mindset that is pleased to be an ass to women, just go to the comments and see the guys that are indignant about the this video. And then the guys that think they are being such a wit by doing things described as offensive and hurtful.

Lesson: Just don't read comment sections. Thankfully, for me, I have nothing in my comment sections...Well, there is the occasional bot generated ad.

_________
UPDATE:

Here's an article looking at how women get treated in the game industry. And another article.

... 

Women in the industry are told by men what is valid for us to feel. The conversations tend not to recognize the reality of the situation, and the very real threats that can occur at gaming events or in our day-to-day lives. We’re told it doesn’t matter, to grow a thicker skin, and that men go through the same thing. 

I have yet to talk to a man who has had to call a police officer due to a stalker, only to be told nothing can be done until they are physically assaulted. It’s hard to explain what it’s like to be at a gaming event, cornered by someone who claims to be a fan, and to be physically kept from leaving by someone holding you in place or putting their body between you and the exit.

...

Far too many guys either are or choose to be blind to what women are being put through. They outright dismiss the abuse and the fear. No one deserves to be made to feel unsafe in our virtual communities. No one deserves to have their concerns so casually dismissed like this. We should expect better, not just tell people to suck it up and take the abuse.

Then there's the anger. The hostility from guys towards women that speak up. It's almost not surprising. Women just talking about the latest phone release, or app, will have abuse thrown at her. Why not when she dares to speak out as well? ...Sigh.

We all deserve better than this.

TWIB's A Black Show

The team at TWIB have been working hard at expanding their brand and shows, while engaging with it's audience. In an effort to give Elon James White, the founder of TWIB, a heart attack, they've moved into producing a weekly TV show. A Black Show (#ablackshow). It's every Friday at 8 PM (PT) on the Free Speech network.

Like everything they do, it offers a look at politics and society, with a unique view and sense of humor. They also bring in a number of different voices to discuss topics.

Here's a little from the show, you can find more here. Also, if you can't see it on Free Speech TV, or miss it, they have the latest episodes available on iTunes.


#GrayRacism

Women, Rape Culture, and Boyce Watkins

Giving Everyday - Supporting Media - Shilling Shockers, Citizen Radio, and TWiB

Previously, I noted some excellent charities to support. (And I hope you considered them.)

I have also wanted to point to some media that could use some support as well. It's always awkward to me, to put things like this forward. It feels like it comes down to advocating for business. I end up feeling this way even if they try and be altruistic, or are just plain fun.

But being so fun and useful, I do want to see them succeed. So I thought I'd note a few here, and let you see if you are fans, or interested in getting to know them better.



Media to know:


Penny Dreadful's Shilling Shockers

If you haven't seen me say it before, see it now. This is my favorite Horror Hosting show. It's been on 8 seasons so far, and now they are looking for financial support for a 9th.

The show follows the witch, Penny Dreadful, her husband Garou, a werewolf, and their friends, Dr. Manfred Von Bulow and Luna 13. as they watch bad old movies. They offer a lot of interesting insight and humor, and make for a hexcellent. evening's entertainment.

Now it's with Indiegogo, so if you are interested in helping them, be mindful of that system's rules. I am hoping they do get the funding they require, as I would love to see another season of the show. And, if they reach a secondary goal, they will finally be releasing a CD of music they've produced for the show. I've been hoping they'd do this for years now. (They've made some lovely fun songs for the show.)


Citizen Radio

On the more serious side (though with plenty of insightful cutting humor), Citizen Radio. The podcasts of Citizen Radio are free. But the show operates exclusively on donations from listeners, and the blood, tears, and sweat of Allison Kilkenny, Jamie Kilstein, Penny, and Dangles (Well, the last two mostly draw blood, and cause tears.). They pride themselves on their independence. But it also means that they need the support of fans and listeners.

They do a daily (Monday through Friday) show looking at the world around us, informing and advocating. They discuss issues and news. They go out into the streets to get stories. They also do interviews with the likes of journalists, thinkers, and news makers. Jeremy Scahill to Lindy West to Noam Chomsky. And they are rudely funny, with a touch of cat crazy (See Penny and Dangles.).

They are passionate and driven in their work. And if you like their efforts, and can afford it, they are worth investing in.


TWiB - This Week In Blackness

TWiB is another story of people covering news and society, and bringing a sense of humor to the reality around us, one podcast at a time. Led up by Elon James White, the team at TWiB put out a number of shows, from This Week in Blackness to Sportsball to We Nerd Hard. There is a variety of great programming.

They do a lot of good. They offer an underheard voice. And they create engaging conversation for you to be drawn into. And, like Citizen Radio, TWiB can bring in interviews you will likely not hear anywhere else.

But they can use support to maintain their quality of work, and take it to new levels. Also, they are moving their operations, and building a new studio. They are in the midst of plans to update there productions, and expand into more video production. They need support from listeners.



So, I hope if you do like any of these endeavors, and are in a place, financially, to help, you consider it. They all seem decent people making the world a bit better. And, if anything, their work is worth you getting to know.



Also, for Citizen Radio and TWiB, you can donate your Twitter and Facebook accounts. This means you agree to an occasional tweet/post promoting their shows on your account. I know for some that isn't desirable. But what it comes down is, at most, a single tweet a day promoting the podcasts. It's a minimal way to support them out.

The Religious Exemption. It's Principle, Except When It's Not.

There have been some constant battles since the latest effort to create a more comprehensive access to health insurance began. But one has been increasingly annoying, galling, and disingenuous. The demand for a religious exemption for businesses.

The idea is that some businesses are owned by religious people, and those people may oppose abortion and/or birth control, or common sense. Comprehensive health insurance would help pay for things like those listed. So, they should not have to offer comprehensive health insurance to their workers. They should be exempt from part of the law.

And many people love the idea of a "compromise" on this. The compromise being that you just let religious institutions deny people basic preventative health care...cause [holy writing of your choice]. And you let businesses with religious owners do the same. And in exchange, nonreligious owners can actually take care of their employees. It is interesting how saying you want to deny someone something for religious reasons sound reasonable to so many people...But that's for another post.

In July two federal appeals courts decided that it was ridiculous for a business to have a religion, as opposed to it's owners. But that is not where the story ended. Last week the federal appeals court decided to agree on how unfair comprehensive health insurance is on the pious.

... 

Requiring companies to cover their employees’ contraception, the court ruled, is unduly burdensome for business owners who oppose birth control on religious grounds, even if they are not purchasing the contraception directly. 

“The burden on religious exercise does not occur at the point of contraceptive purchase; instead, it occurs when a company’s owners fill the basket of goods and services that constitute a healthcare plan,” Judge Janice Rogers Brown wrote on behalf of the court.  

...

It is an interesting point, I grant you. Is it unfair/unconscionable/unacceptable to force people of religious faith to fund and pay money into services that they feel contravene their religious tenets?

Should people be forced to pay for sinful stuff?


Well, I tried to think if there were any other good examples I could draw on for legal rulings. Then I recalled religious pacifism. For some war and fighting is unconscionable, a violation of the will of their god. And, as many point out, tax dollars go to many places in the government, including to the military.

MPR Photo/Elizabeth Stawicki

So, when a pacifist pays taxes, they pay for the ability to go to war. And during a war, they fund that war. So, should religious pacifist be exempt from taxes? Or, should special means be put in place to assure that their tax dollars cannot be used by the military? Should steps be taken to respect and maintain their religious concerns.

Lucky for us, a Quaker, Priscilla Adams, brought the question to court.

Back in 2003, you may remember it (we were at war), her fight with the government came to a head. Going back to 1996 she had been suing the government, saying that she and others had valid religious grounds to have protections against their money being used to fund the military. As part of her religious convictions. Adams for years had been refusing to pay part of her federal taxes.

The response from the government was to demand that she pay her back taxes, and a 50% penalty. She fought this, and worked to try and keep them from placing a lean on her wages to put money towards wars.

So the fight went up the judicial ladder. And, in 2003, the federal appeals courts rules against her. And then the Supreme Court chose to pass on offering an opinion. The courts had spoken.

The result, you may have religious grounds to not pay a portion of your taxes, but the courts, Congress, and the federal government don't care. Pay the taxes and pray for forgiveness.

That is quite a different view from what we are seeing now. Now when we consider should religious people be forced to fund services that may go to things like birth control, the courts say that it's wrong. (wag a finger) These people cannot be placed in this position. The law says everyone should be able to access the full array of preventative health. But, screw that...Religion. Religion trumps all...now.

Funny.

I wonder if religious pacifist should go to court again? They might have a chance now. Doesn't it follow? Shouldn't these grounds be sound enough for them to fight against tax paying? It does seem like the same strain of argument. Or, do supporters of ACA religious exemptions still hold the old opinion that if religion is getting in the way of funding the military, you should suck it up and fund the military?

I do get a feeling that many might have this attitude. That abortion and birth control are the legit religious concerns, the respectable ones. I'd like to think that's wrong, but at a minimum, I don't see religious conservatives as bothered by the Quaker's plight. They seem like they'd be first in line to condemn the Quakers.

But this ruling may not stand. This will be going to the Supreme Court...hmm. Okay, I' not feeling better with that thought. Will the court have their 90's attitude to religious exemptions? Or, will they have the oppose President Obama attitude?

Half the court is already friendly to attacking access to education, voting rights, and the ACA as a whole. That group will most likely be happy to further establish religious prominence over law. As it is, I think there is already a case coming up that may do this in one way.

I guess we will see. Because we are stuck waiting while conservatives play their petty games. And religious exemptions are such a petty game.

Remembering Hedy Lamarr

Today would be Hedy Lamarr's birthday. When she's remembered it's usually for her time in Hollywood, or the recurring joke in the movie Blazing Saddles.

And that is sad. Beyond the acting, she was a brilliant mind. She was a scientifically minded person. An inventor. Past the call of fame, she wanted to use her brains to make her ideas come to life.

And at home, she did that. Her most successful work was in developing a means to use frequency hopping in controls, the controls of torpedoes. Her ideas weren't taken that seriously, though she gave the technology to the US Navy. And from there others took the technology and in later decades made use of it in so many different technologies, right down to what is in your home today (including Bluetooth technology).





So let's be sure to remember this inventor. Remember what she did for science. And, encourage and inspire future inventors around you.

Another DC Comics show coming. A Golden Age hero...No, not her. *UPDATED*

Word is out that we will be seeing ANOTHER hero get a shot at coming to Live Action TV. ...No, it's still not Wonder Woman. Or, other interesting female heroes...

Barbara is not amused.

Issue 29 - Guy Davis, Matt Wagner,
Steven T. Seagle

It's Hourman! ...You all know him, right? Heck, I'll be honest when I first read about him getting a show, for some reason, I read it as the Sandman. And that got me a little excited (Particularly if they were using Sandman Mystery Theatre as a basis. Wesley Dodd. Driven by nightmare to fight crime. And then you could have an awesome Dian Belmont.) But, no, it's Hourman. The hero with the hour of power...think Underdog, or that one Bugs Bunny cartoon with the magic carrots.

And which Hourman?

Rex Tyler?

Rick Tyler?

Android from the Future?

The basic idea for Hourman (Let's just skip the variation of powers, how the powers are activated, and their downsides) is that he created the Miraclo vitamin pill. When he takes the pill he suddenly has strength up towards the levels of Golden Age Superman, great speed, and increased resistance to physical harm.

But the effect only lasts an hour. And then he returns to normal. Generally it was not possible to take a pill more than once a day. But there were times he was written to take multiple pills over an issue of his book.

Manhunter - Birds of Prey # 117

There is nothing wrong with bringing this character to life on TV. It could prove to be good TV.

But we've seen they are already moving now on the Flash, Commissioner Gordon, and John Constantine. Each is up for their own show, on different channels. But Wonder Woman is on pause. No one is talking about an Oracle show. No is talking about Renee Montoya as the Question. No is talking Kate Spencer as the D.A. turned Manhunter. Or, Power Girl. Or, Katana (Yes, she is in Beware the Batman, but that's ending and she could translate to Live Action.).

It is clear they are leaving a lot of good characters they are leaving on the table. And it's painfully clear the women aren't even making it to that table.


____

When you see the addition of an Hourman to the list of heroes possibly appearing on the CW channel. It brings them closer to form something like the Justice Society of America. Two or three more heroes and they could have a team. Granted, they've now introduced Black Canary on Arrow, but they could use more heroines, and/or the could spin off Canary. But, I do still want a Sandman.

Cover by Shawn McManus

And they could do a show between the levels of Constantine and the other hero shows. Dr Fate. Just saying.

You could have Nabu, the source of most of his power trying to take control/force him down certain paths. A show with a hero vying with his own powers, while dealing with apocalyptic dangers. What will destroy the host of Dr. Fate? It's enemies, or it's benefactor?

Cover by Peter Gross

But really I am talking about using Kent Nelson (the original Doctor Fate). And when you have Kent, you have to have Inza Cramer/Nelson around. She started as a foil, who became romantically involved compatriot. And when you have her around you can eventually get an improved Fate.

Cover by Peter Gross

Then maybe she can turn Congress into newts again. That was great.

A guy. A gal. A helmet. It's what we need.

If it was a Conscious Clause, the GOP would be embarrassed by themselves.

As we've seen this weekend, the House Republicans introduced a "conscious clause" into the ongoing budget debate.

This isn't a matter where they want to address a budgetary expense, to claim something, like the ACA, is a fiscal burden for the country. No. This is just an addendum on their other crazy ideas, to take away access to birth control from as many women as they can.

The idea is that if you, the business owner, decide that preventative health care for women is morally or religiously objectionable, you get to opt out. So you, as a business owner, have an out to slash your health care expenses...while taking a religious/moral stand...of course.

But even if you are taking some stand, call this a conscious clause or a matter of Religious Freedom, it is the same thing. This is putting women in a separate and inferior category. This is saying that the preventative health needs of women do not stack up as worthwhile or acceptable as those of men. Sexual health issues of men are clean. The sexual health issues of women aren't clean, and actually troubling. So when someone wants to boot out women's access to The Pill, or other contraception, we'll allow it. I mean, they have "moral objections". How can we not acquiesce to someone having a moral objection. Sure, contraception is medically valid...but I know a church that doesn't like it.

Their are a number of religions opposed to blood transfusions. There are people who morally object to vaccination. No one cares. No one will take access to this stuff away.


Already we've seen a ridiculous exemption given to religious institutions to not have to have any cover even allowed in their health care coverage. Many don't only hire people of their faith. They can't directly control what they do on their own time (have unacceptable relationships, dress unacceptably, say unacceptable things), but they can control this. And the government gave them that power over people.

The Koch Brothers want to be sure they have that power. So does Hobby Lobby, Chick Fil-A, and many others.

The end result that conservatives hope for in this is a stigmatization of birth control. To convince us that birth control or abortion it's all evil.  They want women to struggle. They want society to look in fear at sex.


Did I mention this was a budget battle?

Because we are currently looking at a budget battle, and the risk that the government will shut down.

And the House GOP decided to lob this into the strife we are already besot by. Unbelievable.

No. Unacceptable.

And the Right Wing clowns cheer this on, even lauding a debt default by the United States. They are fools giddily dancing their way through a raging fire.

Why are the Republicans screaming at their own reflection.

I'm unsure, but I think Republicans, like cats and dogs sometimes, don't know it's their own reflection in the mirror. It's true. I think they look in mirrors and don't know what they are looking at.

At least that is the only explanation I can think of to explain the latest ad coming from the GOP.

In the ad a women visits a doctor's office.

And that seems nice. ...Except...she's on...OBAMACARE!!!

That's horrible! Cause you not what that means!

GOVERNMENT INTRUSION IN THE DOCTOR'S OFFICE!!!

You may feel a tiny bit insulted and talked down to
by Republicans.

Yeah. Republicans are warning you about someone trying and force themselves into your medical decisions...the duplicity is so rife I struggle with what to say. It is just amazing.

If you've forgotten, somehow, Republicans have spent years trying to take away women's access to abortion. And long the way they've worked to step in the way of access to birth control, the Pill, and just getting honest forthright information from doctors.

These Republicans are the lot that have put laws on the books to silence doctors from using or offering their considerable medical knowledge, if it offends the dubious morals of conservatives. Republicans have been none too kind to rape victims. And in the last year, they've at least once tried to force women who suffer a miscarriage to go into the police, so they can be investigated.

These are the people now trying to tell us about the dangers of liberal government intervention in medicine. And by intervention, they means having guaranteed access to insurance to make it possible for millions to access needed health services.

They are the cat staring in the mirror, thinking its seeing another cat. Republicans say racist statements, and thinks it's the other cat doing it. They see attacks on women's rights, and see the other side doing it all. They see efforts to destabilize government, and think they have to stop it. They keep hissing and jumping at the mirror, and don't get that it's their own reflection.

How else do you explain this?

Well, they could also just be dishonest pricks, throwing their faults, crimes, and mistakes at the other side and hoping they'll stick...But have we ever seen them do that...regularly since the turn of the century...

And with that cats freaked by their reflection.

WARNING to Conservatives, this video may cause you to learn - Plan B pills

Came across this video. It gives a simple explanation of what the Plan B pill does and doesn't do. Let's get passed the misinformation.


It is not an abortion (Not that abortion should be an anathema.). And when people want to tell you, or someone you know, it is, correct them.

People shouldn't be shamed, or lied, away from their valid medical choices.

Being Boldly Wrong: The GOP isn't moving, it's just moving the furniture around the office...and SMASHING it.

Incredible Hulk V.2 #315 John Byrne, Keith Williams,
Andy Yunchus Dennis O'Neil

The GOP has been trying for months now to say it is a party of the future. New ideas. New voters. New acceptance of the nation around them. But it seems that is all such a huge lie that they struggle to keep up the facade. It will always come down.

Luckily the media isn't watching, most always.

So when candidates aren't racing to a camera to talk about women and their rape myths, or getting caught on film making racist statements, it is pretty smooth sailing  And the GOP has become very accustomed to this arrangement.

They pass their regressive laws, dismantle regulation, and go after the disenfranchised.

Like last week, when the Republican National Committee unanimously agreed that marriage equality was bad, and they would oppose it. Unanimous agreement, no debate. Marriage is between a man and a woman (Who are doing it.). Yes, we all know the blatant flaw in logic right there. This is the RNC, logic is considered liberal (and possible a homosexual). And they made sure to include the point that traditional marriage is where kids belong. So you know they are implying opposition to gay couples parenting. How does a serious modern party do this? By having unserious leaders, and a legion of unserious voters.

As was noted here, this resolution they voted on is just garbage dressed as science and serious policy. But it fits their ideology and they will continue to peddle the inferiority of gay people as some scientific truth.

And Paul Ryan and others in the party are eager to rally the social conservatives to push harder. Continue to push back access to abortion. Push against access to contraception. Push back the definition of rape. Push to make a zygote a being with full rights. (They don't even want gay people to have full rights!)

We've been seeing this for months now. Push after push to make it impossible to access abortion. Moves to limit voting access. Then someone goes on TV and says, as a conservative, the party needs to change, and is changing (earnest smile).

So just remember, as yet a another representative or flak goes on TV, just what lies beneath the surface.

Incredible Hulk V.2 # 375 Peter David, Dale Keown, Bob McLeod,
Glynis Oliver, Bobbie Chase

Standing up to the Religious Right: Katelyn Campbell

We can loose sight of the people who are putting up the hard fights. People who stand up to authority and peer pressure in places where there is just not much cover, and standing out can mean your life will be made hell.

But once in a while we see someone stand up, and refuse to sit back down and be silent. One such person is Katelyn Campbell of West Virginia. She is standing up to abstinence education with blatant religious content.

A religious spurred speaker came in and began to spout to students. Condoms are bad, and don't work. If you have sex, you will get a disease. If you take birth control, your mom hates you. And that the speaker could tell if you would be promiscuous.

Campbell opted out of the event, but was given a recording of it. Hearing it she was outraged and spoke out, and sought those who would listen.

For speaking out, and talking to the media and the ACLU, the principal threatened her. He told her that he may contact the university that she was going to in the fall, and tell them she was of bad character.

In response, she's called for him to resign.

So there she was, taking a stand, having her future threatened, and she did not back down. Good for her. Thank you. Thank you for standing up and trying to make a difference. For science. For education. For the separation of church and state.

And her future university had some thoughts to.

Smart move Wellesley College. Smarter than that principal.

And, again, thank you Katelyn Campbell. People like you can make a difference, and help make the world a better place. We should all try as hard.

It's a TRAP...law. The Anti-Choice Empire and the ongoing War on Women. *UPDATED*

Before now I was unaware of the term TRAP laws. Now, I have seen them at work, but didn't know they had a name. (ThinkProgress looks at the states leading the charge on them.)

TRAP means Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers. It is a legal trick to ban abortion in a state, without actually openly creating a ban. Red tape and regulation. Yes, it is curious how conservatives seem eager to embrace regulation here, while EVERYWHERE ELSE they are violently dyspeptic about it.

Pressing. A cruel and barbaric
punishment.

But conservatives are regularly open to the idea that the ends justifying means, so I'm not agape. With TRAP, they get to micromanage facilities that offer abortions. How big are your closets? What medical machinery do you have on hand? What privileges do you have at hospitals? They just keep stacking on the regs.

It could almost sound sensible. The layering on of regs can seem benign. Safe and sound is good in medicine. But they don't care about making these facilities safe. This is just concern trolling. The rules are not meant to make things better or help the women of a state. These are meant to be just strict enough to make it impossible to have abortion providers stay open.

If one regulation doesn't do it, add another. And if that doesn't do it, keep adding them until they can't function. It reminds me of the old punishment known as pressing. In it weight is added on top of a person until it finally kills a person. When it comes to reproductive rights, conservatives have decided to add the weight of regulation, bit by bit, until those rights slip out of reach.

So, at long we can say the efforts by Republicans to shut down abortion access are, yes, a TRAP.

Yeah...I already know what it is.

So, to keep with the Star Wars imagery, we can't retreat now. We have to push on and fight. ...And we may also have to concentrate all fire on that Super Star Destroyer...I don't know why for sure...But it is really important. Okay?

__________
UPDATED:

Rachel Maddow looked at the TRAP laws last night:

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Anniversaries in Women's Health

Thought it would be useful to remember the anniversaries we have this year, in regard to some areas of women's health.


Roe vs Wade, making abortion a legal option for women, has been the law of the land for 40 years now.

Eisenstadt vs Baird, making it legal for a unmarried person to buy birth control for 41 years now.

Birth control pills were officially approved for sale in the United States 53 years ago. It was expected they would quickly become a nonprescription item.


50 some years of birth control pills. 40 years of legal access to abortion. And conservatives have continued a hostile fight to push us back into a fantasy version of the 1950's. Access to both has been pushed back. Have been going into place for decades now to keep women from their rightful access to abortion. Further attempts are being made to ensure it is not easy to get to birth control. And in the last several years it seems they have become only more determined to end women's right to make decisions on their reproductive cycles.

50 years on. Why are conservatives allowed to continue to dictate this fight? It is time things changed. I am tired of their garbage and need to control women. It needs to stop. We all need to be heard.

To appreciate what society has gained, and what we have to protect (and in some areas of the country gain back), some Loretta Lynn:

The trouble with religious medicine.

Writing that title for this post, I wish I was going to just be talking about new age medicine, or faith healing. But no, I am writing about medical facilities set up and run by religious institutions. Erin Matson wrote on this, and I wanted to focus in and expand a little on her piece.


A desire to aid and heal people is a fine agenda to have. The trouble arises when it's mixed with caveats for just how and if someone is going to receive medical services. At Catholic hospitals their is some question as to what reproductive medicine you can have access to. And this has an impact on people's lives.

If you end up at a Catholic hospital following being raped, what treatment will you get? What help will you receive? If you want to receive something to prevent a pregnancy, you may be out of luck, and they may work to prevent you from getting the treatment you want. And if you are pregnant and need lifesaving treatment that could the pregnancy...it can end horribly for you.

When it comes to abortion, Catholic doctrine is clear and cruel. In Ireland last year, under Catholic doctrine, a life saving abortion was delayed until the fetus was shown to have died, leaving it too late to save the woman. The disease progressed to far and she died. Fetus and mother dead. In 2010, following an abortion to end a pregnancy that likely would have killed the mother, the nun who made the executive decision was excommunicated. A warning to hospital executives everywhere. And in 2009, their was furor in the Church when a 9 year-old, raped by her stepfather, was given an abortion in Brazil. It was legal, under the circumstances. But the doctors and family were all excommunicated from the church, as a punishment and a threat to other Catholics, particularly doctors (Don't recall the step dad getting much grief for what he did.).

Where they can make it law, the church stops abortion services. Where it can't make it illegal, they make it inaccessible, or hard to get agreement to it.

But that is just Catholic hospitals. So no big deal. I wish that were so. As much as I would like to think that this issue is one we can handle, I have concerns.

First. Do you know how the hospital nearest to you is run? Is it religious based? In fact, what is the nearest hospital to you that isn't? Do you know? I have for awhile looked at the city I live in, and I've realized that there are two major hospitals, and they are both Catholic hospitals. So, if I was a women, what would my options be? As well, consider how clinics and other outpatient venues for medical support are setup. Many in this region have funding from the these two hospitals. How does that affect service? I am unsure how far, or where I would have to go to get medical aid unaffected by Catholic teachings on reproductive medicine. That troubles me.

This leads to my second concern  the move to "religious freedom". In many states they are trying to establish rules of Religious Freedom. It's meant to be a way to circumvent the law and use religious doctrine in it's place. It's a way to deny services to gay people, or anyone you don't like, and it is also a way to justify all sorts of medical providers don't have to accommodate patients. It's, apparently, the religious way.

Now, it is interesting to see very religious people eager to show that they mean intolerant and exclusionary when they call themselves religious. But this isn't helping women.

And women in many places in this country are expected to leap through a series of flaming hoops to even get in sight of an abortion provider. Abortion is a simple basic medical service that is legal in the United States. When you look at how it is treated by most states, you would think it is a dirty secret, or used an amazing amount. But that isn't reality. Just the fiction that some choose to believe. And through those lies, women who need medical aid are made to suffer and endure, to fulfill the religious demands of some. How can any of us see this as acceptable?


I don't care if a religious institution wants to open a hospital to help the sick and be of service to the community. But they should not be picking and choosing the basic medical assistance they will bestow. That is not how one ministers, in the medical sense. If you pick and choose like that, based on personal biases, you are not being a serious provider. And you DEFINITELY should not be receiving tax dollars for your work.

This is why we need national secular medical providers. People will provide the full range of medical services. People who are actually serious about medicine.


I also wanted to include a link from the original piece linked at the top, looking at the trouble happening as Catholic hospitals are merging with other hospitals, bringing over their antiquated rules on women's health. It's good to be informed.

MLK and the danger of normalcy.

It's the anniversary of Martin Luther King's speech at the end of the Selma to Montgomery march.

It's worth a read.

I liked this reminder that still stays as relevant today. On normalcy:

... 

But I have a message that I would like to leave with Alabama this evening. (Tell it) That is exactly what we don’t want, and we will not allow it to happen, (Yes, sir) for we know that it was normalcy in Marion (Yes, sir) that led to the brutal murder of Jimmy Lee Jackson. (Speak) It was normalcy in Birmingham (Yes) that led to the murder on Sunday morning of four beautiful, unoffending, innocent girls. It was normalcy on Highway 80 (Yes, sir) that led state troopers to use tear gas and horses and billy clubs against unarmed human beings who were simply marching for justice. (Speak, sir) It was normalcy by a cafe in Selma, Alabama, that led to the brutal beating of Reverend James Reeb. 

It is normalcy all over our country (Yes, sir) which leaves the Negro perishing on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of vast ocean of material prosperity. It is normalcy all over Alabama (Yeah) that prevents the Negro from becoming a registered voter. (Yes) No, we will not allow Alabama (Go ahead) to return to normalcy. [Applause] 

The only normalcy that we will settle for (Yes, sir) is the normalcy that recognizes the dignity and worth of all of God’s children. The only normalcy that we will settle for is the normalcy that allows judgment to run down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream. (Yes, sir) The only normalcy that we will settle for is the normalcy of brotherhood, the normalcy of true peace, the normalcy of justice. 

...

Normalcy. Conservatives continue the fight to maintain their vision of the normal. Their normal is gay people hidden away, or driven away. Their normal is women quieted, shamed, and shunned for their choices, and denied many of them. Their normal is all so white and all so old. And their normal is the wealth always rising up to those that already have so much.

Brotherhood. Peace. Justice. These are things we still need to strive for.

We have progressed a lot. The world, and this country, have changed. But the work goes on. We have the first black president. But we also have active movements to strip away the Voting Rights Act and Civil Rights Act. Many fields are open now to those that aren't white men. But wealth inequality grows, and the black community is still so often the target of law enforcement.

Yes. Theirs still a distance to go.

What's next? Emergency managers appointed for every pregnancy? *UPDATED 2*

I am creating this post so as to not keep updating the older post on how Republicans continue to cut away at women's access to abortion.

The GOP is eager to fill the map below. And even then this has quickly become outdated.

Source

North Dakota has passed an Personhood Amendment through it's legislature. So it now moves to the ballot in 2014, for people to vote on. So it isn't enforceable yet, but we will see how voters in the state go to the polls. (And, it's another reminder of how much we need people to actually get out and vote next year. This type of law is on ballots all over the country.) Granted, this and North Dakota's other draconian law on fetal heartbeats should never pass judicial muster. But they still pass these laws. Tennessee is also pushing an amendment in 2014. They push and push at the perimeters of people's rights. They see how far they can go and not get push back. Then try and set a standard from which they can push further. 2nd Trimester. 28 Weeks. 12 Weeks. 6 Weeks. Conception. Pushing and pushing the rights of women back.

They have to be made to see the country does not want this dreck. We need to respect the needs of women when they make decisions about their own bodies. To do this we need people in office who will defend rights. And we need to go to the ballots (every time they open) and vote to defend our rights.

Because the GOP is fighting hard to on this. Let's hearken back to Kansas with it's recent additional moves to go after access to abortion. We know the GOP's newest bill is pretty severe. They want to give rights to fertilized eggs. They want to be sure women get no aid. They want doctors to tell women lies about abortion. They are trying to create such hardship.

So, to soften the blow of this bill, Democrats tried to offer up amendments. Amendments like giving some consideration to rape survivors, to be sure they get the services they need and want. But, no. Republicans, almost unanimously, voted to block any compassion in their rather cruel bill.

Kansas, you may also remember, is also one of the states where Republicans pushed in conscious clauses to let pharmacist choose to not sell women birth control. Even birth control is a controversy with Republicans. This is what the GOP wants. This what they want for you. To cut women off from basic medical services and medicines they don't like. And we've been dealing with this for half a century.

But, I also want to acknowledge the Republicans (the few Republicans) who have stood up to these moves. Like the governor of Arkansas before them, they point to the pointless expense of defending these doomed laws. But I am starting to think that's just the excuse and cover they're choosing to make the moral and right decisions. Pity they aren't representing folks who'd respect that stand.

_____________
ADDENDUM:

Kansas ain't done yet!

They are now trying to rush through ANOTHER anti-abortion bill, right as the session is getting ready to close. Like North Dakota, they are racing to pass a fetal heartbeat law, to further limit access to abortion (How many lawsuits do Republicans want to put their states through anyway?). They are giving people  24 hours notice on the public hearing on the bill. They waited and want to race this through, so they can get into line for getting sued. All so, they hope so badly, they can deny women access to a legitimate medical procedure.

This is the stuff the GOP focuses on. This is their priority.


AND MORE:

Washington Post has a nice graphic to show how across the country access to abortion gets denied, by weeks.

Media does us no favors in their coverage of Steubenville. *UPDATED*

So you know and are warned, I will be using the term rape a lot in this piece. It's to emphasize a point that the term and the fact it occurred in the Steubenville case is getting glossed over, ignored, or treated as irrelevant. If it is an issue for you/causes you trouble/triggers, apologizes. But that's why I wanted to begin with a warning.


This weekend we finally had a conclusion to the much discussed trial in Steubenville, Ohio.

So, now, I debate what I can add to this result. What has to be said?

I could let the verdict stand as a final statement. But, from news to twitter trolls, people have rushed to say everything that didn't need saying, on the topic of rape to the victim herself. So many people raced to seemingly show us rape culture is alive and well in this country.

Online, many have been eager to denounce the girl raped for drinking, for being in the wrong company, for talking up. Cruelty has come quick and fast. And the point for some people is that she is in the wrong. Or, that her choices make her the one that is guilty. Or, that the true victims are the boys that assaulted and raped this girl.

CNN surprised us all by leading the way on this. As the trial results were announced and as they were being digested, CNN got to the heart of the matter.

It is just galling. There has been a bizarre obsession with these boys, who raped a girl repeatedly, carried her around, showed her off, took photos of their acts, and sent messages around bragging...But yeah, this is really rough them.

It is an amazing bit of journalism. (Particularly Crowley, who says they were found guilty of "rape essentially". What is that? Real rape? Rape rape? Legitimate rape?) But the weird disconnect is troubling. How do they see the events of the night of the crime? How about the lead up to trial? Or the trial itself? Was it all about these boys being put through an ordeal? What is it they think happen to this girl that was attacked? Who has had to relive the attack at trial? And, now is under continuing risk and threat by the city around her, even her former friends.

But, yeah, these rapist had the raw deal. Football stars, with hopes of college success, now quashed...How does this become your takeaway? Is it because they're young? Boys? Successful?

Is it that they were boys being boys? That they were celebrating? That they were having fun? That it just went a bit far? And, if only?

I am at a loss. They made a choice. And over the course of hours they made choice after choice to continue and compound their crimes. But so many media folk just wept for these boys.

And that has an effect. That effect is that it says it's too bad they had to be put on trial for what happen. It's too bad they have to pay for what happen. It's too bad they are being given a hard time for what happen. And it takes us away from what happen. They raped someone.

But for some people, that isn't what happen. And as you watch people on the news avoid using the word rape, as you see people online call this girl a liar, you see the culture that birthed the mind of Todd Akin. It's a culture that embraces ignorance, fears and is suspicious of women, and sees women that survive rape as contemptible.

Rape is a serious and severe issue. But the media and public is uncomfortable with it. How bothered are we all about the frequency of rape in the military? Are we still laughing at the lazy punchline of a man being raped in prison? Do communities angrily rally around sports teams, coaches, and stars when their are accusations of rape?

Source

And the media is not helping. It makes the token effort, but then falls down on the job in fighting the rape culture narrative. Look at the media giants you can list beside CNN that have looked at this story as a matter of the victim causing trouble or being to blame. ABC, NBC, Yahoo, AP, and USA Today. She's tearing her town apart. She was drunk. Social media is such a problem. No. Rape is a problem, a crime even. If they hadn't made the decision to rape they would be looking to college now. But, no. They chose to rape. They chose to assault and abuse a girl and then show no remorse, but brag about it.



Along with this, since the trial, CNN, MSNBC, and FOX have all now played statements from the guilty in which they use the name of the victim of their crimes. This is an underage girl who, until now, had had her name withheld by the media to protect her privacy, and keep her safe from those that are threatening her. So the 3 premier cable news networks have all outed this girl to additional scrutiny and danger. Brilliant work, asses. It's just more callousness from the media on this case.

The media has let us down quite a bit on this case. We expect more. We need better.


_____________
ADDENDUM:

I appreciated this piece looking at what we've seen of a CNN reaction to the reaction to the Steubenville coverage. CNN's reaction has been to just shrug. Apparently Harlow is shocked that people read her coverage as being one-sided. And, as a woman, she doesn't know why someone would think she would slant her coverage.

But that is what comes from being inside the bubble. It's like what happens in Washington or when reporters get embedded with the military. The lot of the media became entrenched in the attitude of Steubenville, which is pretty toxic.

As well:

... 

I don’t particularly care that Poppy Harlow and Candy Crowley are women. Gender is not an excuse and it’s disgusting to use it to dismiss valid criticisms. Women contribute to victim blaming and rape culture too but they reallyshould know better. Harlow and Crowley made a very big mistake by airing that segment. 

I’m sure they didn’t intend to come off the way they did but their intentions don’t particularly matter. What they did was contribute to rape culture.Period. The reason both need to apologize, however, is because they aren’t even aware of this. They can’t see how their segment was harmful and disrespectful. That’s a problem. With this case in Steubenville, many people have finally discovered that we don’t know that much about rape culture, victim blaming, or even rape itself. If we want to start combating sexual violence in a meaningful way, then we need to hold people accountable and completely stomp out rape culture and victim blaming. No one gets a pass because of their gender or anything else. 

...

That is the thing about rape culture. It isn't just men raping, or men dismissing rape. Women make up more than half of the human population, so if they weren't taking part in rape culture, it really would be a different problem.

So, yeah, women do take part. Some judge others, and condemn them, for not living the right way or for "letting themselves" be attacked. Some embrace cultural narratives, that put lower priority on the experience of women in the some occurrences of rape (A "drunk girl" has ruined the lives of two boys.). And when women do these things it's just as unacceptable as when men do this.

Maybe Harlow, and Crowley, are oblivious to how they came off to their audience. But that doesn't mediate the effect they have. They helped enforce this toxic culture. And that's why I am happy that people are being pissed off at it, and being sure to be heard. The comments made last week by the media cannot be allowed to be the final word.

Rob Portman, CPAC, and the GOP Mind

Conservatism is suffering many internal problems these days. But I think it all comes down to a problem changing. They are behind the times on issues like gay rights and abortion. I

True, conservatism is supposed to be drawn to maintaining old ways. But it is supposed to change some, hence conservatives embracing things like clothes wearing and fire. Change comes to all. But the "modern" conservative movement in the United States seems to have chosen to take a stand against this. Instead of advancing and changing with the times, they seem to have decided to become more entrenched and vitriolic.

But in this day, sometimes, we see a little change. We see some eye opening and self-reflection. This last week offered up Republican Senator Rob Portman as an example of this. Having learned that his son is gay, he's' been moved to reexamine policy he's pushed and attitudes he's held.

Source

And I'm willing to take him at his word on this. Trying to complain about why he changed how he feels immaterial. If he changes his voting pattern and his advocacy now, it's hard not to be happy.

He's come in contact with and been affected by a part of the world he was oblivious to. Great. For that matter, I am pleased if wants to join the fight to guarantee rights.

It doesn't undo the suffering he's helped cause, co-sponsored DOMA, defended Don't Ask Don't Tell, supported constitutional bans on gay marriage. But if he wants to change now, and take heat from Conservatism for it, good for him.

Okay?

For most of us, empathy and contact help shape our worldviews. We meet and talk with people different then us and it helps shape how we think. Or, we like to learn, and that leads us to an awareness of other groups and cultures, and their histories and issues. And through these venues, we grow and change ourselves, and we are concerned about how we impact them ( By what we say, what we do, what laws we endorse and vote for.).

Portman has opened himself up to ONE group now. Will he do it for others? Does he consider how his votes affect his daughters health? Does he have family who've been financially wiped out by an illness that he considers as he  is drafting bills?

This the problem of the GOP mind. It's closed off from to looking too far passed itself. When the GOP pushes anti-gay law, they don't think too hard about how it will affect gay people. Or, how anti-women law will affect women (Though you may have noticed the number of times some, if not all, the Republican women have broken ranks in the passed few years on women's issues.). When they cut aid to the poor, it's something cut from a group that is just a caricature and stereotype. Their laws and impact are not fully measured, beyond how they advance ideology and agenda.

And they continue down this destructive track, except in those rare cases where it personally affects them. Look at Chris Christie and Peter King. They took very quick turns to supporting some federal government spending and presidential action, once their states were hit with calamity. They got a heaping dose of personal effect dumped right on. Still, passed that event, they both struggle to comprehend the needs of other Americans. The sneer at government aid still resides on their faces, once the matters where they are personally affected pass.

The GOP just struggles with empathy.  It's what we see with recent talk on immigration reform. They keep talking about how it will win them Hispanic support. They don't talk near enough about it being the right thing to do, it's just a vote winner. And that is just sad.

And you see the sensibilities they now cling to played out in a cartoonish manner at this week's CPAC event. It wasn't well attended, from what I saw, but it reflects how Conservatism is thinking, voting, legislating, and impacting the United States.

People who need financial help are lazy and looking for handouts. Women who want an abortion are bad people. Gays are choosing to be shunned. Blacks and Hispanics are...You know how they talk.

Getting angry at people for being different sells at this event. The poor are to be derided. Foreigners are to be sneered at. And government aid is to be stopped. It's the same angry rhetoric they drag around to every event, every year. The times, the places, the experiences of people in nearby communities, all irrelevant. The anger is what matters. They live in a sick cycle.

And cycle is what it is. They try to ensure from the earliest age possible to keep kids limited to acceptable knowledge sources. Then as they grow up, keep them limited to resources for information, and get them to shun and hold other sources in contempt. And, if they succeed, they have someone who goes to Liberty U, listens to Rush Limbaugh, watches FOX News, and chuckles when someone calls the rest of the media, the lame stream. The bubble is complete, on to the next generation.

But then, every once in a while, something hits them in their own lives. They open their eyes just a bit and notice the world around that they impact. And, maybe, they decide to care and be more aware. They decide to help and grow as a person. And, sometimes, they recoil and get angrier and seek places to toss blame, retreating further into the bubble.

So, I am happy Portman has gotten some sense, on one issue. The rest of the country awaits his awakening on their concerns as well. And the whole of the country awaits the GOP and Conservatism awakening to the reality and needs of this nation.

The GOP chairman was eager to call CPAC a great representation of what the Republicans, and conservatism, is now. This is an event that had people talking about how good slavery was for black people. Unbelievable.

WAKE UP! CPAC is over, and it's time to get up and open your eyes to this concerns and needs of the country.

Don't hit snooze again. Time to face the reality outside your bubbles, and in reality.

New Pope, Old Problems

New Pope! New Pope! New Pope!

Pope Francis I: Lovechild of Alec Guinness and Jonathan Pryce.
Really, doesn't he look like George Smiley undercover?

It's a Francis! The first one. He's also the first Jesuit. He's also the first pope coming from the Americas (though an Italian family), Argentina to be precise.

And everyone went mental at the news. He's so nice, so friendly, such a shunner of wealth and privilege. Great. What will change now? What can kind of person...pope is he?

So the good:

• Long standing concern with poverty and inequality. 

"We live in the most unequal part of the world, which has grown the most yet reduced misery the least. The unjust distribution of goods persists, creating a situation of social sin that cries out to Heaven and limits the possibilities of a fuller life for so many of our brothers."

This is nice. A stand on poverty and how it impacts people is good. And if the pope is speaking out on economic inequity, that will be grand. Maybe some of the conservatives in the US will listen and learn. (No. I know they won't listen or learn.)

• He's been refusing a many of the trappings of his post as cardinal up to now. He takes the bus. He lives in smaller rooms in Buenos Aires.

How will this translate? He has to live in the palace. He has to be driven in the popemobile. So will his philosophy carry over? And how? ...And was he still using his summer home?

• Spoke out against priest that won't baptize children born out of wedlock.
• Has shown sympathy for those suffering from AIDS.

It's nice. But if he wasn't sympathetic, he's be a horrible person. Still, the are positives.


In Between:

• Opposes Liberation Theology

It is an interesting thing. One of the outgrowth of Liberation Theology is the idea that their is inequity that leaves some poor and put upon. Yet Francis opposes LT. It seems, while he supports it's economic message, it's social and political messages do not meet with his approval.

The church has been hostile to it's advocates for some time now. And it's criticism of church hierarchy and authoritarianism may not be things the pope agrees with. Nor may he care for the view of Jesus as a revolutionary looking to bring upheaval and change to society. Nor it's ties to Marxism.

It is really no surprise to see a pope selected that opposes this view. At least the economic message will be addressed, we hope.


The problems:

• Opposes gay marriage.

He's called gay marriage a plot again God, and openly opposed gay marriage law in Argentina.

“Let’s not be naive, we’re not talking about a simple political battle; it is a destructive pretension against the plan of God. We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.”

• Opposes gay people adopting children.

He's said it's a form of abuse to allow gay people to adopt.

• Opposes abortion access.
• Opposes birth control.

He has talked, in relation to abortion and contraception, of "the culture of death".

All of the above is par for the course within the Catholic Church hierarchy  Still, it shouldn't be forgotten that these are stands in the church. They are stands having negative impacts in the United States, and around the world.

• There are questions on whether he collaborated with the military dictatorship of Argentina in the 1970's in actions that lead to numerous deaths, including priests.

What seems clear is that there was complicity between the Catholic Church in Argentina and the military. Now, the question is who in the church, and what? I have not heard any evidence supporting that the pope is tied to deaths, though it has been alleged. The question is, how did he handled being a religious leader during this time of military rule and abuse.

Remembering those
that disappeared.

It was a complex thing in those years. Religious groups were drawn in, obliged, threatened, and/or in league with oppressive rulers. Some priest were present at torture sessions. Some shared information with the military. Some argued against people's treatment. Some were brutally murdered. All of this is part of the reason Liberation Theology arose.

One journalist has written a book that says the pope, while in Argentina, hide away political prisoners of the military. He was hiding them for the military. He placed these prisoners at his holiday home on the island El Silencio, while human rights delegates were in the country. This would mean he worked with the military to hide prisoners so they would not be seen or talked to by outsiders. This is all claimed by the book.

I have not heard this story verified, or if there is another side to the story. He has said that he spoke up for some priest that were arrested to get them freed, and helped some escape the government. This is his position, and what he's been willing to talk about. There is obviously more to the events of this period in Argentinian history.

Sadly, I have not seen any news people here in the US look into it.